TenuredVulture wrote:

kruker wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

kruker wrote:Because the job search is god awful, I don't feel like finishing this paper right now or starting up a new one for my internship, and don't feel like working out just yet, I started entertaining the thought of doing a PhD again. Ended up reading this paper: The Science of Political Science Graduate Admissions and came across this gem.

First, for students on the
margin of being admitted, Harvard
accepts those who have resources to
attend, even if the admissions com-
mittee ranks them below im-
pecunious students we reject. Second,
all minorities receive our maximum
financial aid package regardless of
need. These policies affect roughly
3-10 students from our primary list
and all minorities every year.

That's really something.

How often though does support have anything to do with need? If we're talking about a PhD program, it's really not a good idea to pay your own way.

It's not a good idea to pay if you're the one having to pay. And the question precedes that of support/need, it's admitted/need that's at stake.

I get that--I was referring more to the issue of minority students receiving full support regardless of need. That is, need isn't really a factor in determining departmental support, as far as I know. Support is a function of how much the program wants the particular student. And so, clearly, Harvard wants minority students very badly. That is, given my understanding of how financial support typically works in grad programs, the statement concerning minority support is misleading.

It seems like they're conflating two different issues--admitting students who are foolish enough to pay somewhere north of 60k per year plus living expenses to enroll in a PhD program and awarding financial support on the basis of something other than need.

I believe a conscientious PhD program would not admit students it cannot financially support. I know tons of programs do it. But I always advise students to forego their dreams of academia unless they get a commitment from program that admits them.

djbigf wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

kruker wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

kruker wrote:Because the job search is god awful, I don't feel like finishing this paper right now or starting up a new one for my internship, and don't feel like working out just yet, I started entertaining the thought of doing a PhD again. Ended up reading this paper: The Science of Political Science Graduate Admissions and came across this gem.

First, for students on the
margin of being admitted, Harvard
accepts those who have resources to
attend, even if the admissions com-
mittee ranks them below im-
pecunious students we reject. Second,
all minorities receive our maximum
financial aid package regardless of
need. These policies affect roughly
3-10 students from our primary list
and all minorities every year.

That's really something.

How often though does support have anything to do with need? If we're talking about a PhD program, it's really not a good idea to pay your own way.

It's not a good idea to pay if you're the one having to pay. And the question precedes that of support/need, it's admitted/need that's at stake.

I get that--I was referring more to the issue of minority students receiving full support regardless of need. That is, need isn't really a factor in determining departmental support, as far as I know. Support is a function of how much the program wants the particular student. And so, clearly, Harvard wants minority students very badly. That is, given my understanding of how financial support typically works in grad programs, the statement concerning minority support is misleading.

It seems like they're conflating two different issues--admitting students who are foolish enough to pay somewhere north of 60k per year plus living expenses to enroll in a PhD program and awarding financial support on the basis of something other than need.

I believe a conscientious PhD program would not admit students it cannot financially support. I know tons of programs do it. But I always advise students to forego their dreams of academia unless they get a commitment from program that admits them.

call me naive, but i thought that this was always the case for non-science PhDs...

TenuredVulture wrote:If you're talking about admitting students without funding, it's probably pretty common in the humanities and social sciences. But I think lots of programs see grad students as sources of really cheap labor, and in fact probably fund more students with TAs than they should. (For instance, consider a random SEC school other than Vanderbilt--they've all got a bunch of TAs teaching Freshman comp--how many of these people get tenure track positions?) That is, too many people are enrolling in PhD programs given the realities of the academic job market.

You see, Peggy, that's what you call a loaded question. No matter how I answer, there's a bullet in every chamber designed to blow my brains out.

Fusilli Jerry wrote:I want to be friends with this guy:

After a dispute with a passenger who stood to fetch his luggage too soon on a full flight just in from Pittsburgh, Mr. Slater, 38 and a career flight attendant, got on the public-address intercom and let loose a string of invective.

Then, the authorities said, he pulled the lever that activates the emergency-evacuation chute and slid down, making a dramatic exit not only from the plane but, one imagines, also from his airline career.

On his way out the door, he paused to grab a beer from the beverage cart.

Police sources said that when authorities found Slater he seemed to be in the midst having sexual relations.

WilliamC wrote:Dominos pizza guy just left. After at least 10 minutes. Never met him. Went into a big thing about "when did it become acceptable not to have visible numbers on your house". Luckily I have big visible numbers or I might be dead.

Barry Jive wrote:So they went to see a good Irish movie that had been garnering praise here in the states. It was called The Crying Game. I think most of you know how that story ends.

td11 wrote:have you nerds seen this?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsKype77L6o&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

Marion wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

PrattRules wrote:

Marion wrote:We're getting married in two months. Someone sent us a check now. Do we cash it now or wait?

If we cash it, I wouldn't spend the money until after the wedding, but I still don't feel right about cashing their check before the wedding. Plus it's made out to Mr. & Mrs. But, if I don't cash it, they'll have extra money showing in their account for 2 months and if they're like pacino, they'll complain about not cashing their check.

I'd cash it. I operate under the assumption that people try to balance their checkbook on a pretty regular basis.

Do you have a joint savings type account? Deposit the check in that. If you don't, maybe the check is sufficient to justify opening one?

We have a joint account. But clearly my name doesn't match the name on the check. Guess I'll have to call the bank and find out how to endorse it.

ek wrote:very clever

http://thechive.com/2010/08/10/girl-qui ... 33-photos/

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:

ek wrote:very clever

http://thechive.com/2010/08/10/girl-qui ... 33-photos/

Hoax